Monday, July 13, 2009

Well, the Post editor saga on alleged indecent photography and publishing such thereof, took me on a journey into the past and in so doing, today's laws of Zambia, in particular the Penal Code. I here cite a few sections!

1. Sentence of death. Section 25. (1) When any person is sentenced to death, the sentence shall direct that he shall be hanged by the neck until he is dead.

2. Defamation of President. Section 69. Any person who, with intent to bring the President into hatred, ridicule or contempt, publishes any defamatory or insulting matter, whether by writing, print, word of mouth or in any other manner, is guilty of an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a period not exceeding three years.(No. 6 of 1965)

3. Unnatural offences. Section 155. Any person who (a) has carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature; or (b) has carnal knowledge of an animal; or (c) permits a male person to have carnal knowledge of him or her against the order of nature; is guilty of a felony and is liable to imprisonment for fourteen years. (As amended by No. 26 of 1933)

4. Indecent practices between males. Section 158. Any male person who, whether in public or private, commits any act of gross indecency with another male person, or procures another male person to commit any act of gross indecency with him, or attempts to procure the commission of any such act by any male person with himself or with another male person, whether in public or private, is guilty of a felony and is liable to imprisonment for five years.(As amended by No. 26 of 1933).

5. Obscene matters or things. Section 177. (1) Any person who - (a) makes, produces or has in his possession any one or more obscene writings, drawings, prints, paintings, printed matter, pictures, posters, emblems, photographs, cinematograph films or any other object tending to corrupt morals; or (b) imports, conveys or exports, or causes to be imported conveyed or exported, any such matters or things, or in any manner whatsoever puts any of them in circulation; or (c) carries on or takes part in any business, whether public or private, concerned with any such matters or things, or deals in any such matters or things in any manner whatsoever, or distributes any of them, or exhibits any of them publicly, or makes a business of lending any of them; or (d) advertises or makes known by any means whatsoever with a view to assisting the circulation of, or traffic in, any such matters or things, that a person is engaged in any of the acts referred to in this section, or advertises or makes known how, or from whom, any such matters or things can be procured either directly or indirectly; or (e) publicly exhibits any indecent show or performance or any show or performance tending to corrupt morals; is guilty of a misdemeanour and is liable to imprisonment for five years or to a fine of not less than fifteen thousand penalty units nor more than seventy-five thousand penalty units.

Premised on the foregoing citations, surely what the Post editor is being charged with is just one of the many unnatural offences in our laws. It is for this fact that I find the noise being made a contradition of natural thinking. It is reflective of unnatural thinking. That is, it does not conform to the norm. It should be inarguable that these citations reflect a collective proclivity to unnatural thinking among a people.

The norm is that we are a very morally upright and christian people. This is the norm as I know it and as it has been proclaimed. And it is as it has always been reflected in our laws.

It is because of this norm that we still hang people by the neck until death, we criminalise blow jobs, and homosexuality (as in citation 1, 3 and 4). The president is like a god, chief or king, so we can not say anything very bad against him!

Surely if we so claim moral uprightness why are we now frenzied over the Post editor's circumstances? Offences in citation 3 and 4 are deemed offences against morality, whilst citation 5 (Obscene matters or things. Section 177) is deemed to corrupt morals. It is surely is inarguabe that the law being used against her is premised on an assumption of high morality, just as are laws against homosexuality or blow jobs!

If it is now being argued that the law in the Post editor's case is archaic or repressive, then can we also hear voices calling for the review of all other archaic laws.

Let us move away from these forms of unnatural thinking, and which border on hypocrisy. We need to call on the citizens to ensure that the Law Development Commission fulfils its mandate, which in part, is to remove archaic pieces of legislation from the statute book.

This backwater country which I call home never ceases to maze me! I hope tomorrow, the SDA reservations with teaching reproductive organs is not made into law. Or indeed the pictures in biology textbooks are not erased!

Friday, July 3, 2009

This blog serves to elucidate my criticisms of the voices on the Dora Siliya saga, in particular CSOs.

My consistent arguments are that the Dora Siliya Tribunal findings is more a case of public impropriety, than law. That is, evidence of her committing criminal offences was not manifest.

I have studied the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, Zambia Development Agency Act, 2006, and Public Procurement Act no. 12 of 2008, and failed to find which clauses within the Tribunal allegations and evidence tendered one can argue criminality in the Dora Tribunal saga.

A breach of an Act of Parliament or an act contrary thereof, is not legally an offence or criminal offence, unless that particular Act prescribes an offence and subsequent penalty. This is how the laws of Zambia are provided and it is within this framework that I find the persistent arguments by CSOs lacking in fact, hence my use of the term “misinterpretation of facts”. Public impropriety is addressed administratively, where the law does not provide for offences.

To which end, a president can simply have administrative recourse to an erring public servant, when the law does not provide penalties for a breach. Administrative recourse can be a reprimand, suspension or dismissal.

There is need for CSOs to rethink what they are communicating to the public, and to concern themselves with the gaps in law that serve to perpetuate our backwardness.

For instance, the Tribunal found that:

1. "...Dora Siliya signed a Memorandum of Understanding which committed Government to a sum of Money beyond her Ministry threshold without approval of the Zambia Public Procurement Authority."

2. "...the Minister of Communications and Transport did not follow the requisite tender process in the selection of R.P Capital Partners Limited. It is not the law that the selected tender supplier presents a different proposal from others."

3. "... We certainly are of the view that the Minister did not act above-board in this matter. However as we have stated, there was no evidence that she actually shared information with R.P Capital Partners Limited."

4. "It is the strong view of the Tribunal that Government Ministers must strictly observe the Constitution and the Laws made there under and Government regulations. Breach of the Constitution and the Laws made there under by Government Ministers and officials undermines the Rule of Law and contaminates the Government system as it sends wrong signals to the general citizenry. In the present case we leave Hon. Dora Siliya’s breaches to His Excellency the President to deal with."

I can cite such other findings, which I do not dispute, what I dispute is that these were the allegations brought before the Tribunal, and that these are criminal!

Unless, the Tribunal Report is wrong, the following were the allegations that constituted the proceedings:

- that Dora Siliya breached Section 4 (a) and (c) of the Parliamentary and Ministerial Code of Conduct Act, with the complaints premising this constituting the following:

1. "The first allegation against Hon. Dora Siliya was as follows; (i) As alleged by the first Complainant, the Honourable Minister of Transport and Communication did, against the advice of the learned Attorney- General did award a contract in the sum of US$ 2,000,000 to R.P Capitals Partners of Cayman Island to value the ZAMTEL assets without due regard and / or compliance with the provisions of the Zambia National Tender Board Act, Chapter 394 of the Laws of Zambia (ii) As alleged by the second complainants, the Honourable Minister of Communication and Transport on the 22nd December 2008 signed a Memorandum of Understanding with R.P Capital Partners Limited on behalf of the Government of Zambia, totally disregarding Legal advice from the Attorney- General’s chambers"

2. "The Second allegation was that Hon. Dora Siliya did arbitrarily cancel a duly awarded contract by the Zambia National Tender Board (ZNTB) for the supply, delivery, installation and commissioning of a Zambia Air Traffic Management Surveillance Radar System of Lusaka and Livingstone International Airports awarded to Thales Air Systems of South Africa in favour of Selex Sistemi Integrati of Italy."

3. "The third Complaint against the Hon. Dora Siliya was made by a Consortium of Civil Societies comprising Transparency International Zambia, SACCORD,CITIZENS FORUM, Foundation for Democratic Process, Women for Change,Civil Society for Trade Network, Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection , Civil Society for Poverty Reduction, Zambia Youth Association Against Corruption and Caritas Zambia. The third complaint charges Hon. Dora Siliya with corruptly receiving K12,500,000.00 public funds."

The Tribunal summation being - "After considering all the evidence, we have found that allegation number two and three have not been proved against Hon. Dora Siliya. But we have found that the first allegation relating to the failure to comply with the legal advice of the Attorney-General and failure to observe tender procedures has been proved."

Allegation number three (3) from CSOs should not have been a part of the allegations. This was alleged criminal activity. How can any reasoning person put it within the Parliamentary and Ministerial Code of Conduct Act? What was the motive? Or did the lawyers misguide CSOs?

I ask this in the light of the fact that it is the duty of citizens to report criminal activities and if possible provide information on criminal activities. Failure to divulge such information is a crime. Why was such evidence not tendered in the proper legal process?

Again we were subjected to misrepresentations of the Chirwa Tribunal Findings on Dora Siliya during the Press Conference Q and A. What exactly do our journalists read?

The Tribuynal never found Dora guilty of all what the Petitioners had alleged. Period! "We find that Hon Dora Siliya did not breach Section 4 of the Parliamentary and Ministerial Code of Conduct Act as alleged...we have found that allegation number two and three have not been proved against Hon. Dora Siliya...But we have found that the first allegation relating to the failure to comply with the legal advice of the Attorney-General and failure to observe tender procedures has been proved..." - D. Chirwa Tribunal Findings.

Can CSOs and the media in this country stop the nonsense of misrepresenting facts! In the public domain, Dora's case is one of public impropriety and not law. I urge the CSOs, Media and Dora to re-orchestrate their dance in a publicly meaningful manner and not mere noise. CSOs and aggrieved Zedizens should re-institute a proper legal process as what was challenged in the tribunal was not founded on reason. Let us not find individuals guilty because of our own warped reasoning.”

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

"GOVERNMENT says United Party for National Development (UPND) president Hakainde Hichilema has no moral right to call for a reduction in the size of Cabinet when his party has just increased the number of vice-presidents to four.Chief Government Spokesperson Lieutenant-General Ronnie Shikapwasha said in an interview in Lusaka yesterday that it is morally wrong for Mr Hichilema to ask Government to cut the size of Cabinet."

Surely, is there thought in what our politicians say? It is obvious that it is morally right for HH to question the size of Cabinet. Cabinet is a public cost, HH's party or pact is NOT. And this Lieutenant-General Ronnie Shikapwasha surely knows.

My plea to the Lieutenant-General is that he concerns himself with ensuring that the technocrats in government put in place infallable mechanisms for enforcing reductions in public resource wastage as evidenced by the hundreds of GRZ vehicles still clogging the roads after 5.00pm and at weekends. Could it be his, is still one of them? And Lieutenant-General Ronnie Shikapwasha, how come suddenly the number of vehicles without GRZ plates has increased at some ministries? I am sure the many Toyota hilux vans, I saw parked at a Government ministry on Government road are government vehicles!

HH was talking about public wastage, and he has the moral and citizen right to do so. Please let us not always politic for politics sake.

And, lastly, even our public media also seldom thinks before they write. The headline "Veep challenges PF/UPND alliance" should surely have read "MMD national trustee challenges PF/UPND alliance". (http://www.times.co.zm/news/viewnews.cgi?category=4&id=1246340091)

It is clear from the news article that George Kundu was on party duty and not government duty. He spoke as MMD national trustee. What I would have loved the media to tell us is whether he used government resources or party resources. Abuse of government resources for partisan political pursuits does not just happen during electoral periods. I always wonder where CSOs go in between elections!

Monday, June 29, 2009

We can not expect any change in livelihoods accruing from wage increments. The costs of social amenities in this country are dictated more by mere profiteering than "demand and supply" assumptions. These costs always change with rumours of wage increments!

Please allow me to digress.

There is always so much I want to write about in this backwater country of ours called Zambia. And mostly, it is because I long ceased to have respect for what many consider newsworth individuals or institutions. Critical and analytical thought is rather rare and may be that is why, as a country we are always arriving where we are supposed to have left.

I wrote many years ago that, if we do not change our ways, “When our children seek our footprints in the sands of history, they will arrive at only one conclusion. ‘We went nowhere'.” Frighteningly, this is becoming true. Least we forget, it is also apparent that we are the only generation that does not improve on the successes of preceeding generations.

The fact that we are not getting anywhere or that we are not improving on the circumstances of our great grand parents is chiefly because we do not want to be critical of our obtaining circumstances. It is a comfort zone, even if messy and smelly!

Sorry.

Wage strikes in Zambia always remind me of a friend that decided to rent a bar premises in Chilenje compound. The owner and landlord had enough of the competition around and the profits could not sustain his life style. Renting it out was a good option, so the story goes. I will call my friend, Mbinji and the landlord, Mufalo.

In October, Mbinji entered into a rental agreement of six months advance rent, and duly paid Mufalo the tenancy contract amount. Mbinji refurbished the place and appealed to a different patronage. In the first three months, Mbinji did not see Mufalo, and was happy that he did not have a nosey landlord. But, he heard that Mufalo had taken a new wife.

However, things took an expected turn in January. Mufalo suddenly appeared, and asked Mbinji if he could advance him some money. And I hear this is how the story went.

Mufalo: "BoMbinji, I can see you are doing very well. I hear the bar is always crowded. You see my wife wants us to move the children from Chilenje Primary to Nkwazi."

Mbinji: "That is nice. Nkwazi is very expensive, I just moved my children from there to Chilenje Primary School. I could no longer afford it."

Mufalo: "Well, I am sure you will send them back, now that you are doing fine. Actually, I came to ask for an advance payment on the rentals."

Well, I could continue with the narration, but the rest is known. Mbinji did not advance Mufalo the rentals, as he still had to recover his costs due to refurbishments. The bar closed, when the next rentals were due as Mufalo had decided to increase the rent by 50 percent. Mufalo did not get to send his children to Nkwazi. And his wife divorced him! Both Mbinji and Mufalo returned to where they were before.

The moral of this story is that monetary increases in our obtaining socio-economic environment do not always move persons from point A to B. In short, we can not expect any change in livelihoods accruing from wage increments.

From 1991 to today, we decided to dance with the devil we did not understand! Nearly, 18 years later, we still have not interrogated our dance, mostly because for the few it is havesting gold, and this is irrespective of whether one is in government, donor circuit, church or civil society. The individual benefits to be reaped are immense!

The rot that came with this country's shift from provision of social amenities to where the State allowed interested individuals to asssume State responsiblities is inarguably where the solution to our problems lie. We can not go anywahere if the State fails to provide or regulate housing, health, education, and transport. These amenities need regulation, with such regulation being direct or by State intervention through CONTINUED provision of equivalent services. And in this country, there was no continuation in quality and quantity!

Surely, how then can wage increments address the fact that costs of social amenities are dictated by factors most distant from the regulation of the State? A nurse, teacher in Lusaka seeks to send his or her child to a private school, and the private school owner always increases the schoo fees each year!

I have to close here, as I surely do not intend to write a dissertation on State Failure in Zambia. But we should always be cognisant of the fact that the proliferation of NGOs or CSOs in general is always indicative of the failure of the State to provide for its people.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Tomorrow (Thursday, June 25, 2009 AD) the media will be in a frenzy. "RB talked so much rubbish about HH, Sata and Mmembe.., RB failed to commit himself to the health workers strikes.., RB defends Dora.., RB has known Dora for a long time..., HH has never insulted RB.." This will be the news as this is what RB called the press conference for so we will be made to believe. And it is what our always misinformed public will believe. Already, I have had many calling, sms'ing this viewpoint. I will not faulty this viewpoint, it is their opinion, but I will not hesitate to argue that as a nation we need to seriously re-assess our interpretation of policy directives that politician enunciate. It is clear, many (include so-called intellectuals) do not know what constitutes a policy directive.

To this end, I seek to argue that what tomorrow we, Zedizens, will not be told are the following policy directives ensuing from RB's enunciations.

1. There should be a legal and institutional framework for private-public partnerships in basic social infrastructure investments. This means that the fellows who had wanted to build the toll free road from Leopards Hill to Chirundu, should now have an enabling framework;

2. Political leaders in public office and senior servants who have personal to holder government vehicles should not use them for personal business. The vehicles should be parked on government premises when not being used for public service;

3. Public officers (political and civil) should stop procurement of expensive vehicles;

4. Public officers (political and civil) should minimise workshops, and should endeavour to hold workshops on their premises;

5. The ACC should set up a Fraud Investigations Unit;

6. Government will set up a Financial Intelligence Unit to curb white collar crimes;

7. The ACC and Auditor General's Office should always be provided the needed financial resources; and,

8. Members of public should not hold people who are living off proceedings of crime in high esteem. The public should report such individuals;

And of course there were the administrative directives of setting up commissions, which are short term ad hoc arrangements. But, which will be THE news!

And indeed the administrative directive aimed at ensuring that those with delegated duty carry it out diligently.

These policy directives are what I captured by listening carefully to RB’s press conference, and to me they are more important than the expletives he went into during the Q and A. This is because these are directives that can found transparency and accountability if there are implemented. The implementation challenge is not RB’s, as I know that is what many are already asking and saying. Surely, that is being naïve. Politicians DO NOT implement. The implementation challenge is for the senior public officers that administrate the public service delivery systems to translate these into practicable solutions to this country's development needs, criminality and abuse of public resources. The challenge is for the citizen’s to hold RB accountable if these directives are not realised, and to ask “when” we should see results.

The foregoing are opportunities that any well meaning Zedizen should realise, but, unfortunately, the tragedy of our country is that these opportunities enunciated will be deemed rubbish.

Next week I stroll back to the University. I have been away from lecture rooms for six (6) months, and I must say whereas I miss the students, I do not at all miss the human support side of the Institution.

Sometimes, I dream of a University of Zambia empty of administrators. That surely will be a place to work in. It is tragic that public administrative structures in our poor nations often end up being the demotivational circumstances to one's otherwise enjoyable pursuits.

I love interacting with students. I love learning from students, as I am not the guardian of all knowledge. I am just a slightly brighter candle in a sea of beautiful candles. And I have always hoped many of my academic colleagues will accept this simple reality, as a means of making University education a journey beyond theories.

Just thinking of how the University of Zambia is managed, at Department, School, or whatever other level always sends a shiver through my body. Camaraderie is as alien as efficacy, efficiency and being relevant to obtaining future circustances. Finding witches and wizards, is the game that is always played. A pity. I wonder if I will be the found witch again.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

I wonder what RB will say tomorrow. I am thinking he will do a Mwanawasa 20% salary concession, and of course, play the Opposition game of expletives. But I also, wonder what Mmembe will write on Thursday, but I am thinking the headlines will be something to do with sacred cows, and lack of anti-corruption and civility in the incumbent presidency.

Monday, June 22, 2009

Yesterday, I saw a picture. It was of an elderly man bowing down before another man. I read that the man on his knees was a government Minister. The man before whom he bowed down was the President of this country I call home. Today, I read many arguing that in our tradition, there is nothing wrong with an elderly man bowing down before another. I also read many arguing that it is because of bootlicking that a Minister can bow down before a President. A President is not a chief or king, so the argument of tradition is a fallacy, the latter say.

Tomorrow, I asked an artist to paint me a picture of an elderly man kneeling before another. I took the picture to a group of children and asked them what they thought.

“That is Jesus, see he is praying before the lord,” says one.

“No. He must have done something wrong. He is now asking for forgiveness,” another says.

It is a beautiful picture, this picture of a government Minister kneeling before a President. Its meaning is as deep as the children eloquently understood the message conveyed by an elderly man kneeling before another. The beauty of the picture is that it shows the depravity of power.

Friday, June 19, 2009

It is either that the private media in Zambia always intends to misinform the public or is it that the media itself exists in an abyss of reason. Reading today's Post news stories (print and electorinic), which are in effect opinions of opposition party leaders of Edith Nawaki, Michael Sata, and the fellow from SACCORD, one wonders how it can be that a country can have such inanalytic people conceived as newsworthy. There is nothing informed or meaninful that any of these persons are communicating. In short, they remind one of the noise a dog whose tail has been trapped by the door makes.

It is simplistic and uttermost a manifestation of analytic insufficiency for Nawaki to shout that RB's re-appointment of Dora Siliya is ethnical! This does not help the public. The fundamental issue is simply that Dora Silya is NOT currently conceived to be publicly acceptable. Her behaviours in the Tribunal issues did not show any evidence of her being able to instil public confidence in her execution of public office. This is the bottom line, and this has meaning to the public and not the nonsense of tribalism, ethnicity, which is utter rubbish and cheap.

As for SACCORD, I wish CSOs can take time to analyse issues before opening their mouths. We do not need uninformed statements, as they can be construed informed by lesser informed members of society.

Lastly, I sincerely wonder whether being an opposition leader means that you have the licence to talk without basis. That is innuendo, speculation and allegations. Sata surely should simply tell us of this corruption knowledge that Dora has on Rupiah Banda, that way he will be helping us. And surely, why can't the media interrogate Sata for this knowledge? What value is there in simply reporting an innuendo or allegation without requesting that the person justifies himself or herself? Well, may be this country's journalism ethics belong to the pit latrine!

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Reading the CSO, in particular, Transparency Internationals, response to Judge Musonda's judgement on the Dora Siliya case, one is left with utter feelings of pity and a sense of melancholy. Judge Musonda used precendents to argue his case, the Tribunal did not cite a single precendent on their finding that Dora breached the constitution, how then can any analytic individual argue that the ruling is unfortunate. It is mere hogwash and crap for CSos to misrepresent facts. Judge Musonda should be upheld for his legal uprightness, and not be critised because of the mere winds of political and public discontentment. CSOs in Zambia should stop being euphoric and playing to the media spotlight.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

It is surely a historic feat that Rupiah Banda can pick a hammer and hit the nail closing his own coffin. It is frightening that a leader can re-appoint a publicily (not legally) unaccepted person.

The Dora Siliya re-appointment is amidst overwhelming public discontent with Rupiah Banda's leadership, and it surely is evidential of unfounded political arrogance. I will not be surprised if Dora Siliya does not receive the expected management support that is normally provided to a minister. Her performance, will as a result be constrained.

This is a time when the few good men left in our political governance institution of cabinet should show their moral mantle(if they do), by stepping down in disagreement with this one act of political foolery and arrogance.

This incident is purely a disfigurement of one's political opportunities to change a frightening negative political perception as a leader. The question that begs to be answered and now left to innuendo and speculation is - Whose interests is Rupiah Banda really serving?

The inalienable premise of political acceptability or correctedness is that there is a difference between what is legal and what is legitimate.

Dora Siliya does not have any legitimacy to ascend back into political office simply because her political acceptableness is non-existent. This is despite the fact that Judge Musonda eloquently argued that Siliya is absolved of the misrepresentation of breach of the constitution. There is no denying the fact that legally she is a free person.

But it should be undoubted that being legally absolved of a misrepresented breach of the constitution, does not absolve one of his or her political unacceptedness. It is a folly of the incumbent president, Rupiah Banda, to re-appoint a person who in the political perceptions of the majority of Zambians has no moral legitimacy to hold political office again.

In any case, I consistently argued that the Tribunal did misrepresent the interpretation of the Attorney General's legal advice, but this is not to say I absolved her of any perceived wrong doings. For instance, I find it had to have trust in a public individual that can transact publicly in her car and at a filling station!

Her suitability for public office was brought in question, not simply by her ignoring the AGs advice, but by the manner in which she conducted public affairs. And this, I had hoped the president and his advisors would understand. But, it is clear it is futile to believe our leaders will understand that legal decisions are seldom in line with political legitimacy or acceptability.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

I am starting the day stressed. Really not understanding why Zedizens are now so prone to believing falsehoods. Did not sleep well, as I kept wondering how an educated group could not understand the difference between a lie and a truth. It is simply a question of "a lie repeated so often becomes a truth". Our current intellectual space has been reduced to one of innuendos and speculations. Arguing from a knowledge point of view is deemed, partisan or suspect! Utter rubbish.

It is tragic. The average person I work-related interact with is neither desperate nor hungry. It actually is the subject of the work that is mostly desperate or hungry. Yet, the intellect of these diametric opposites is the most distant from dialectic inquiry. In short, the dodo and the dodos are the same.

Its another day, sitting having coffee at Kili. The discussion topics are typical. The Post, Sata, HH, RB, and wherein to draw the line as to who is communicating facts or opinion. The bottomline is slowly, I am believing it does not matter anymore as Zedizens are not ready to exist in the future.

An understanding of our present socio-political and economic circumstances, I have consistently argued should be premised on what future as a people we seek to live in today. An understanding which unfortunately is not acknowledged or even debated. Instead we waste time debating nonsensical issues of presidential candidates as if presidents are the future.